CAVC Case 92-1369: Anxiety
CAVCReal U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) decision · February 14, 1996 · NEBEKER, Chief Judge
This is a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims — the federal court that reviews Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions, one level above the Board. Court decisions can vacate, reverse, or affirm what the Board did.
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Conditions Claimed
AnxietyBackCervicalHipTBISkinHeart
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
AnxietyBackCervicalHipTBISkinHeart
Why It Was Decided This Way
The second question is whether the Board erred in 2 denying the appellant's claim on the merits.
Reopening was denied for lack of new and material evidence.
On August 13, 1991, the BVA denied reopening of the seizure disorder claim for lack of new and material evidence.
at 341), and failed to apply the benefit of the doubt in his favor.
VA regulations outline in more detail when reconsideration may be accorded: (1) on allegation of obvious error of fact or law; (2) on new and material evidence from service department records; or (3) where allowance of benefits was influenced by false or fraudulent evidence.
While the Board is not required to accept the medical authority supporting a claim, it must provide its reasons for rejecting such evidence and, more importantly, must provide a medical basis other than its own unsubstantiated conclusions to support its ultimate decision.
In supporting its denial of service connection for a seizure disorder as a residual of the in- service gunshot wound, the Board did not address all of Dr.
245, 247 (1993) (BVA must provide appellant with reasonable notice of any evidence, medical texts or treatises to be relied upon in rendering decision and reasonable opportunity to respond); Hatlestad v.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
Not New Material|Preponderance Against
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →